This paper outlines a method for planning motions in the presence of uncertainty. Tasks are modeled as geometrical goals in configuration space. The planning process consists of determining regions from which particular motions are guar anteed to reach a desired goal successfully. An algorithm is presented for backprojecting from desired goal states. The backprojection regions are computed by erecting constraints that geometrically capture the uncertainty in motion. The relationship of backprojections to goal recognizability is discussed within the formal framework of preimages. This relationship suggests a partitioning of desired goal states into recognizable goal states. Backprojections are actually per formed from this partitioning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arnold, V.I.1978. Mathematical methods of classical mechanics . New York: Springer-Verlag.
2.
Brooks, R.A.1982. Symbolic error analysis and robot planning. Int. J. Robotics Research. 1(4):29-68.
3.
Burridge, R., Rajan, V.T., and Schwartz, J.T.1983. The peg-in-hole problem: statics and dynamics of nearly rigid bodies in frictional contact. To appear .
4.
Canny, J.F.1984October. Collision detection for moving polyhedra. AI Memo 806. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory .
5.
Donald, B.R.1984. Motion planning with six degrees of freedom. AI-TR-791 . Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
6.
Dufay, B., and Latombe, J.1984, Cambridge. An approach to automatic robot programming based on inductive learning. Symp. Robotics Research. Brady, M. and Paul, R. MIT Press. 97-115.
7.
Erdmann, M.A.1984. On motion planning with uncertainty. AI-TR-810 . Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
8.
Inoue, H.1974August. Force feedback in precise assembly tasks. AI Memo 308. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory .
9.
Reprinted in Winston, P. H., and Brown, R. H., eds. 1979. Artificial Intelligence: An MIT Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.
10.
Lozano-Pérez, T.1976. The design of a mechanical assembly system. AI-TR-397 . Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
11.
Reprinted in part in Winston, P. H., and Brown, R. H., eds. 1979. Artificial Intelligence: An MIT Perspective. Cambridge: MIT Press.
12.
Lozano-Pérez, T.1981. Automatic planning of manipulator transfer movements . Trans. IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. SMC -11(10):681-689. Reprinted in Brady, M., et al., eds. 1982. Robot motion . Cambridge: MIT Press.
13.
Lozano-Pérez, T.1983. Spatial planning: a configuration space approach . Trans. IEEE Computers. C-32(2):108-120.
14.
Lozano-Pérez, T., Mason, M.T., and Taylor, R.H.1984. Automatic synthesis of fine-motion strategies for robots . Int. J. Robotics Research . 3(1):3-24.
15.
Mason, M.T.1981. Compliance and force control for computer controlled manipulators . Trans. IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. SMC-11(6):418-432.
16.
Reprinted in Brady, M., et al., eds. 1982. Robot motion . Cambridge: MIT Press.
17.
Mason, M.T.1982a June. Manipulator grasping and pushing operations. AI-TR-690 . Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
18.
Mason, M.T.1982b. Compliant motion. Robot motion , Brady, M. et al., eds. Cambridge: MIT Press, 305-322.
19.
Mason, M.T.1983 October. Automatic planning of fine-motions : correctness and completeness. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, Computer Science Department and Robotics Institute .
20.
Ohwovoriole, M.S., Hill, J.W., and Roth, B.1980 March 5-7, Milan, Italy. On the theory of single and multiple insertions in industrial assemblies. Proc. 10th Int. Symp. Industr. Robots . Bedford, U.K.: IFS Publications : 545-558.
21.
Ohwovoriole, M.S., and Roth, B.1981, Warsaw, Poland. A theory of parts mating for assembly automation. Proc. Robot and Man Symp. 81.
22.
Raibert, M.H., and Craig, J.J.1981June. Hybrid position/ force control of manipulators . J. Dynamic Sys. Measurement, Control . 102:126-133.
23.
Reprinted in Brady, M., et al., eds. 1982. Robot motion . Cambridge: MIT Press.
24.
Salisbury, J.K.1980 November, Albuquerque, NM. Active stiffness control of a manipulator in cartesian coordinates. Paper delivered at IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control.
25.
Schwartz, J.T., and Sharir, M.1982. On the piano movers' problem: II. General techniques for computing topological properties of real algebraic manifolds. Tech. Report No. 41. New York University, Computer Science Department, Courant Inst. of Mathematical Sciences.
26.
Simunovic, S.N.1975 September 22-24, Chicago, IL. Force information in assembly processes. Proc. 5th Int. Symp. on Ind. Robots. Bedford, U.K.: IFS Publications415-431.
27.
Simunovic, S.N.1979. An information approach to parts mating. Ph. D. thesis . Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering.
28.
Taylor, R.H.1976 July. The synthesis of manipulator control programs from task-level specifications. AIM-282. Stanford : Stanford University, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory .
29.
Whitney, D.E.1977 June. Force feedback control of manipulator fine motions . J. Dynamic Sys., Measurement, and Control . 98:91-97.
30.
Whitney, D.E.1982 March. Quasi-static assembly of compliantly supported rigid parts. J. Dynamic Sys., Measurement, and Control . 104:65-77.
31.
Reprinted in Brady, M., et al., eds. 1982. Robot motion . Cambridge: MIT Press.
32.
Will, P.M., and Grossman, D.D.1975. An experimental system for computer controlled mechanical assembly. Trans. IEEE Computers. C-24(9):879-888.
